Search form

And the Winner Is: Barack Obama

Without question, the winner of Wednesday’s Republican debate was Barack Obama. This wasn’t apparent at the beginning; during the first forty minutes, Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul argued about earmarks, and made the usual promise to cut taxes, cut spending, and magically balance the budget. But by the end of the event, the candidates had revealed their hostility toward women and Latinos, and further ensured that they would stay on Obama’s side into the fall.

It wasn’t actually until after the first commercial break that moderator John King asked the candidates about the elephant in the room—birth control. After Gingrich went through the usual motion of insulting King for posing the question, the candidates embarked on a fantastic voyage of obfuscation, dishonesty, and outright attacks on women’s health.

Mitt Romney, whose ancestors were driven from the country by the government for their religious beliefs, began the exchange with an attack on the administration’s birth control mandate: “I don’t think we’ve seen in the history of this country the kind of attack on religious conscience, religious freedom, religious tolerance that we’ve seen under Barack Obama.” Of course, the public disagrees, in survey after survey, a majority of Americans—including Catholics—voice support for the administration’s decision to require birth control coverage from religiously affiliated employers.

Rick Santorum followed Romney up with an extended discussion of the “dangers of contraception,” which he defined as of out-of-wedlock births, single-parent homes, and growing poverty. It suffices to say that this was an…odd discussion. By definition, contraception can’t be responsible for out-of-wedlock births, regardless of how much Santorum would like to believe otherwise. To be fair to Santorum, his comments weren’t as bad as Ron Paul’s, who asked his competitors to save their scorn for the women who use the pill, and not the pill itself:

But sort of along the line of the pills creating immorality, I don’t see it that way. I think the immorality creates the problem of wanting to use the pills. So you don’t blame the pills. I think it’s sort of like the argument – conservatives use the argument all the time about guns. Guns don’t kill, criminals kill.

So, in a way, it’s the morality of society that we have to deal with. The pill is there and, you know, it contributes, maybe, but the pills can’t be blamed for the immorality of our society.

Women voters, take note: If you use the pill, you’re immoral, and basically the same as a gun-toting criminal. And while Ron Paul doesn’t stand a chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination, this basic sentiment was shared by each candidate on the stage. Indeed, Romney was sure to clarify that “there was no requirement in Massachusetts for the Catholic Church to provide morning-after pills to rape victims.” Arizona Republicans might be impressed by this, but I’m not sure you can say the same of women who might need those services.

For President Obama, whose reelection bid depends on high support from women voters, this was gold. Even better was when the candidates discussed immigration. Newt Gingrich voiced support for a massive wall on the border, Ron Paul doubled-down on the myth that undocumented immigrants “use up” public resources, and Mitt Romney endorsed the Arizona anti-immigration law as a model for the nation.

Even if Republicans were trying to make themselves a hard sell for women and Latinos, I’m not sure they could have done a better job. The Obama campaign must be thrilled.

Comments

One thing that seems to be missing in all this religious fevor about birth control is that the benefit is offered it doesn't have to be taken. Maybe if we had better debate moderators and newscasters they would point that out. They would also point out Brazil bans birth control. The rich limit their familes cause they go overseas to buy the pill but there is a high population of children in poverty. So much the rich have to rent apartments due to crime. I would like the republicans to be ask "If you don't support birth control how will you prevent those "illegals" from coming over here and having babies" "How will you stop those "welfare queens" from getting government services.

Interesting reaction. Mine was that any one of them would be better than another four years of Obama.

"But by the end of the event, the candidates had revealed their hostility toward women and Latinos"

Nope, never did. No hostility towards either group was expressed (at least none that a reasonable person would discern).

It wasn’t actually until after the first commercial break that moderator John King asked the candidates about the elephant in the room—birth control. "After Gingrich went through the usual motion of insulting King for posing the question."

No, he didn't. He simply pointed out that there is an obvious double standard in the MSM for the treatment of social issues, using partial birth abortion as the example.

Of course, the public disagrees, in survey after survey, a majority of Americans—including Catholics—voice support for the administration’s decision to require birth control coverage from religiously affiliated employers.

Irrelevant. The Constitution is not amended by popular vote. This is a matter of religious freedom, and the extent to which the government can ignore that freedom. Also, polls show that only 40% of Catholic WOMEN believe that the government should dictate such matters to their Church, despite the fact that they are users of birth control. There's no "win" for Obama in that statistic..

"(re Santorum) It suffices to say that this was an…odd discussion. "

Not odd at all, and common among people of faith, the point being the effect of accessibility of things like contraception, abortion, welfare etc. and how they may facilitate an increasingly amoral society. Anybody who is of faith, or well read on such issues, knows how common Santorum's musings are.

"Women voters, take note: If you use the pill, you’re immoral, and basically the same as a gun-toting criminal."

Not what he said. What he was pointing out that in societies of faith at all times in all places, sex outside of marriage is considered immoral (that is an irrefutable fact) and even OUTSIDE of societies of faith which do not comment on moral issues regarding fornication, children outside of wedlock create a SOCIAL problem (which is obvious) and is thereby a MORAL one. Add up how much we spend as a society on children born outside of wedlock (5X more likely to be raised in poverty) and you could have paid for a single payer health care plan and had spare change for coffee.

"Arizona Republicans might be impressed by this, but I’m not sure you can say the same of women who might need those services."

A nonissue. These services are all available, FOR FREE, outside of employer health care plans. Isn't that why you guys fight so hard for funding for Planned Parenthood?

"For President Obama, whose reelection bid depends on high support from women voters, this was gold."

Among those who care more about free sex without responsibility more than the economy, I'm sure that's true.

"Ron Paul doubled-down on the myth that undocumented immigrants “use up” public resources"

"Myth"? You mean that they don't use the public schools, public health system, go to jail, or that you somehow believe that the stats can be tweaked to show that they pay into the system more than the above? :-)

"And Mitt Romney endorsed the Arizona anti-immigration law as a model for the nation."

It's not an "anti-immigration law", liar. It's a law which permits local authorities to enforce EXISTING FEDERAL LAWS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS targeted against ILLEGAL ALIENS.

Sheesh. Does the spin never stop from these guys?

"The Obama campaign must be thrilled."

I'm sure that's true; of course, they were saying they were going to hold the House all they way up to 2010 Election Day.

Even the right leaning Rasmussen Poll has Obama creaming Romney by ten points today. Check out just the last two days of RCP state polling and Obama shreds all the Republican mediocrity across the rust belt, including Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and even Virginia. And sure, it's months till the election and anything can happen. But wouldn't you rather be on top, in the driver's seat, than looking at the big O's dust trail. Romney and Santorum, perfect for self destruction. Not a chance in 2012. The more the public learns about these two creepy guys, the better for Obama.

The polls are useless. The main factors for the election are going to be the economy. If gas is reasonable, unemployment actually down... not the fake numbers Obama is pushing, and the dollar is stronger, then Obama will win. If the economy is bad, Obama will be a one term president.

Isn't "morality" the whole reason of why birth control is even in the public eye? I don't know that Ron Paul really thinks that using birth control is immoral, he is calling it immoral for the sake of the argument. Again, immorality is weighted. It's immoral to kill somebody and it's immoral to jaywalk or sneeze without covering your mouth. The weight of what he is saying to be immoral is undeclared... However, even if Ron Paul condemned it, he knows he has no authority to make a dictation of how and when we the people use it.

Show Details FROM:TaterSalad TO:Van Scheurich Message flagged Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:27 AMComing this summer in the United States......$5.00 per gallon gas! Thank you Barack Obama! Thank you for supporting your "green jobs agenda", wind mills and solar companies that went bankrupt while walking away from the Keystone Pipeline project that would have brought us oil/gas products from Canada.
http://www.mcall.com/business/mc-gas-prices-20120214,0,2776477.story?track=rss

I feel like the Republicans are just playing into the Obama administration's hand here. Many women are doubtful about the republican candidates after the birth control fiasco and the fact is, if Obama plays his cards right, he could earn the support of the Catholic Church in the United States, which would pretty much mean he was sitting pretty come election time. The only thing he needs is for the Republicans to alienate a few more people, preferably in the labor and unions sectors.

I don't pay too much attention to the polls. I've had a few pollsters call my house and I tell them that Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread. That's not how I feel; I just like messing with pollsters.
Come election time, I think the voters will look at the high unemployment, low credit rating, ballooning national debt, record home foreclosures, the draining of the national treasury to give to campaign contributors and disguise it as a 'stimulus', Fast and Furious, high energy prices, record #s of people on food stamps and other government assistance, unpopularity of Obamacare, I could go on and on, but my point is that in spite of all the cheerleading being done for this guy by the lamestream news media, most people are going to look at their lives and realize that they're not better off now than they were four years ago and will vote him out of office.

I can tell that most of the economic commentary are emanating from men. They wouldn't know that contraceptives are part of basic health care for women--68 percent of whom use it for noncontraceptive purposes. Menstrual irregularity, pain, and excessive bleeding and ovarian cancer prevention are not something you guys know about. It averages around $100/month. For working poor and struggling middle class women that can mean a world of difference.

Of course Reagan was re-elected with an 8+ percent unemployment--but it was trending downward--as it is now. No one will vote over issues like the national debt or the nation's low credit rating because they remain abstractions with no direct impact on the purse. The gas price spike is due to with rising tensions between Israel and Iran--the Strait of Hormuz is a major thruway for ALL sea-bound gas supplies from the Middle East.

You discount that people on food stamps and other government assistance--such as unemployment--will vote to keep the assistance. Which is why the GOP-initiated (and Obama-approved) Voter ID acts being passed around the country are crucial to the GOP in November. It disenfranchises millions of the poor, the elderly, college students, and minorities. Oddly enough, the Voter ID acts have also been disenfranchising military servicemen and--in all likelihood--victims of foreclosure robosigning. The 99 percent all know where the stink is coming from--corporations and Teapublicans.

What cheerleading for Obama? Virtually all of the lefty, progressive sites and the "lamesteam" liberals from Glenn Greenwald to Paul Krugman draw checks to bash Obama on a weekly basis. And authors Ron Suskind and Chris Hedges do the same with their latest. The only reliable Obama-bots are moderate conservative Andrew Sullivan and Ezra Klein (not always), guest writers at HuffPo, and assorted Obamacans that most people don't know about. I can't think of anyone on network TV. Can you? Please don't say Oprah. She's not news media.

What's funny is that Liberals who comment on GOP debates would be the first to agree that Conservatives wouldn't be watching a Democrat debate, and even if they did, it wouldn't matter, since they know they're not getting their vote no matter what.

And all the fuss over the independents, who break what, 52/48, is a lot of about nothing, since they're not enough of them to likely make a sway in a state by state electoral college system.

If the Author thinks Obama won Wednesday, measure that against oil up to $108 on Thursday, over $4 a gallon, and will rise 10 cents for every $1 oil goes up, coupled with about another inevitable $0.65 rise in gas price due currency valuations that haven't hit yet, measure Obama's "victory" in the 20 whatever GOP debate against at least $6 a gallon gas.

$6 gas due to Obama killing Off shore drilling, Anwar, drilling everywhere, Fracking,, Keystone, anti-coal, anti-nuclear, etc. Obama certainly doesn't have the silver bullet to get lower gas prices, but he sure had them to shoot every industry that would have lowered oil, gas, and energy prices everywhere.

Victory. Victory? Gas Price Blame wars have begun. And Obama has no army in that fight.

Of course Obama is the winner. The GOP has a robber baron and a religious zealot for frontrunners and the more the debate, the more they alieniate women, ,minorities, and increasingly, independent voters. Most Americans won't buy wnat they're selling.

Mark these words: "The Constitution is not amended by popular vote." You can bet that KhadijahbintMuhammad (?) will shrill that the decision by the Maryland legislature, sure to be signed by the Governor, to legalize same sex marriage -- to give equal rights to a minority, should be put to a popular vote. This despite the fact that numerous state and federal courts have ruled the ban unconstituional.

The facts are that drilling is up 300% under Obama, and the US is a net gasoline EXPORTER at the moment, yet the price remains high. Answer - drilling isn't going to fix the price problem, nor is any Canadian pipeline bringing us the most expensive petroleum in the world. I say we should stop drilling US oil altogether, and use up the oil in the Middle East first. Then when oil is $500 a barrel, who gets the last laugh?